Home » Uncategorized » Keswick’s Ecumenicalism #2, in Keswick’s Errors: an Analysis and Critique of So Great Salvation by Stephen Barabas, part 2 of 17
The content of this post is now available at the link viewable by clicking here. It combines all the parts of this series of blog posts in one file. Please view the material at that link. This part covers from the words: Since at Broadlands communion with devils through spiritualism found an important place … without the special protection that Christ
provides as Head of His congregation.”
Why do the footnotes to this article mention the tribe of Asher? I'm confused on this one. Luke 2:36 and Revelation 7:6 talk about the tribe of Aser, but not Asher. Was this a typo?
Just to shed some light on the reason for the alternative spellings:
The Old Testament was translated to English from Hebrew (and a small amount of Aramaic)
The New Testament was translated from Greek
When you go from one language to another, there are different sounds available. One major difference between Hebrew and Greek is the fact that Greek has no "sh" sound.
When a name is brought from Hebrew to Greek, any "sh" sounds are changed to "s" because Greek has no "sh".
The correct English translation of the Hebrew is Asher. The correct English translation of the Roman representation is Aser.
I hope this clarifies things.
Thomas, Kent, or anyone else, feel free to add to this or correct any mistake I made about this.
You are correct that the KJV is literally translating the Greek NT into English while the Hebrew OT is literally translated in the KJV and this explains the difference between the spellings. I wouldn't say that there is only one, universal reason why sounds go one way vs. the other, but it is why the Lord is "Jesus" in English, "Jésus" in Spanish, "Iesous" in Greek, and "Yehoshua/Joshua" in Hebrew.
Why do the footnotes to this article mention the tribe of Asher? I'm confused on this one. Luke 2:36 and Revelation 7:6 talk about the tribe of Aser, but not Asher. Was this a typo?
I'm not saying I'm necessarily correct. Are there two different spellings: Asher and Aser?
Dear Anonymous,
Yes, "Aser" and "Asher" are alternative spellings, both referring to the same son of Jacob and his tribe.
Thanks.
Just to shed some light on the reason for the alternative spellings:
The Old Testament was translated to English from Hebrew (and a small amount of Aramaic)
The New Testament was translated from Greek
When you go from one language to another, there are different sounds available. One major difference between Hebrew and Greek is the fact that Greek has no "sh" sound.
When a name is brought from Hebrew to Greek, any "sh" sounds are changed to "s" because Greek has no "sh".
The correct English translation of the Hebrew is Asher. The correct English translation of the Roman representation is Aser.
I hope this clarifies things.
Thomas, Kent, or anyone else, feel free to add to this or correct any mistake I made about this.
You are correct that the KJV is literally translating the Greek NT into English while the Hebrew OT is literally translated in the KJV and this explains the difference between the spellings. I wouldn't say that there is only one, universal reason why sounds go one way vs. the other, but it is why the Lord is "Jesus" in English, "Jésus" in Spanish, "Iesous" in Greek, and "Yehoshua/Joshua" in Hebrew.
Thank you for the input, posters.
What would be the reason for Revelation 7:6 being "Manasses" in the KJV instead of "Manasseh" like it is in most if not all other versions?
Yes, "Manasses" is a transliteration of the Greek, and it is why the KJV has that reading in Rev 7:6.
Thanks.